I thought it was clear that the canon party was captured with you because of their motivation from BG1.
Jaheira and Khalid swore to watch over Charname (whether Charname wants to be watched or not).
Dynaheir and Minsc were on a mission to study Bhaalspawn.
Imoen is your sister and asked people from the siege camp for help. The only ones motivated to do so were the canon members.
Makes sense to me.
Make sense to me, too. But where in SoD are these motivations stated? If these are the reasons these NPCs join at the end of SoD, then SoD didn't do its homework because it is nowhere stated. It's head canon, if at all.
I don't think Dynaheir in original (unmodded) game ever states her search for Bhaalspawn? I think it's added by BG1NPC Project, tbh.
I posted these motivations myself a while back somewhere on these forums. They are what came to me after pondering about it for a while - because their joining was something SoD was supposed to *explain* but failed.
@verlaine Because, after being ousted to Caelar by Charname, he can't. He is forced to flee and attacks the Coalition camp to try and acquire a staging area for his own siege on Dragonspear. The dead coalition soldiers would also provide good undead fodder.
I did play the version @verlaine is mentioning as well. You had the battle more or less with H. taking Caelar's role.
I understand why it's not good, it just felt as railroaded as it was before, like there needs to be that battle come what may. We have the big code and the pyrotechnics and we need to show them to you. In the end, less can be more. When you confront H. with what you know and you convince C. to believe you, he flees to the portal. And when you follow, he plays the trick like in original. And you go on from there.
Why not discuss this in the mod's own topic? Maybe here is not the best place. Ask the author directly is far better.
A commentator said this about the latest Star Wars trilogy and the film, The Last Jedi, in particular.
"They had one chance, one chance in the history of the universe to bring back the original cast and give us the closure that, as fans, we have been waiting for. And they blew it."
SOD is nowhere near as bad and obviously the emotional involvement is nowhere near as devastating, characters, at least, survived intact.
Oh man, I loved SoD, but if people despise it as much as I despise The Last Jedi then I have to feel empathy for them. That damn movie left a hole in my soul...
A commentator said this about the latest Star Wars trilogy and the film, The Last Jedi, in particular.
"They had one chance, one chance in the history of the universe to bring back the original cast and give us the closure that, as fans, we have been waiting for. And they blew it."
SOD is nowhere near as bad and obviously the emotional involvement is nowhere near as devastating, characters, at least, survived intact.
Oh man, I loved SoD, but if people despise it as much as I despise The Last Jedi then I have to feel empathy for them. That damn movie left a hole in my soul...
I don't despise SOD, far from it. It's a good game, but not a BG game.
But it strikes me the same type of mistake was made. Too keen to make "their" mark, too keen to update in an effort to be "relevant". Hubris in a nutshell.
I thought it was clear that the canon party was captured with you because of their motivation from BG1.
Jaheira and Khalid swore to watch over Charname (whether Charname wants to be watched or not).
Dynaheir and Minsc were on a mission to study Bhaalspawn.
Imoen is your sister and asked people from the siege camp for help. The only ones motivated to do so were the canon members.
Makes sense to me.
Make sense to me, too. But where in SoD are these motivations stated? If these are the reasons these NPCs join at the end of SoD, then SoD didn't do its homework because it is nowhere stated. It's head canon, if at all.
I don't think Dynaheir in original (unmodded) game ever states her search for Bhaalspawn? I think it's added by BG1NPC Project, tbh.
I posted these motivations myself a while back somewhere on these forums. They are what came to me after pondering about it for a while - because their joining was something SoD was supposed to *explain* but failed.
I thought it was clear that the canon party was captured with you because of their motivation from BG1.
Jaheira and Khalid swore to watch over Charname (whether Charname wants to be watched or not).
Dynaheir and Minsc were on a mission to study Bhaalspawn.
Imoen is your sister and asked people from the siege camp for help. The only ones motivated to do so were the canon members.
Makes sense to me.
Make sense to me, too. But where in SoD are these motivations stated? If these are the reasons these NPCs join at the end of SoD, then SoD didn't do its homework because it is nowhere stated. It's head canon, if at all.
I don't think Dynaheir in original (unmodded) game ever states her search for Bhaalspawn? I think it's added by BG1NPC Project, tbh.
I posted these motivations myself a while back somewhere on these forums. They are what came to me after pondering about it for a while - because their joining was something SoD was supposed to *explain* but failed.
If you charm her in BG1 she tells you that.
SoD didn’t address the canon party’s motivation because it never changed from BG1.
I’m almost to the end of my second SoD playthrough, but I’m pretty certain that Dynaheir or Jaheira says something along the lines of
Charname might be an a$$ but it’s our duty to keep an eye on them.
BTW, @UnderstandMouseMagic I know that, for people my age, Star Wars was ruined many years ago. It was bad enough watching the third movie, “The Care Bears Save the Universe”. But even before that, there was this
It's been thought about, but not really planned. My version would have involved defending the castle from coalition troops (much like in NWN HotU), but it'd require giving PC a very good reason to suddenly turn on his allies and side with the enemy - definitely not some "I make decisions here" one-liner excuse.
Interestingly I would have expected an entirely different turn of events when joining forces with Caelar. Imho a good point of joining her could have been after surrendering Bridgefort. In fact, for this very reason I was like "Heya - it's me - Bhaalspawn (TM)!". After all, I had just (with a little liberty) completed the task given to me by Kharem(?) and the crusade could finally call the fort theirs. The fact that you couldn't join Caelar (or be delivered to her ) in any of the scenes felt incredibly rail-road-ish and is my number one disappointment with the title. I love so much about it - but it just happened to deny the choices that I tried to make at every corner
Anyways I would have expected something along the lines of:
Joining Caelar and agreeing to follow her crusade, using your blood to open the portal (voluntarily or not)
Making some last minute preparations (side quests similar to the under-cover quests in Dragonspear), however not so much focussed on the alliance (they should, if I'm not mistaken, be a few days behind) but rather on the invasion of hell
Potentially falling for Hephernan's trap - i.e. witnessing the crusade fall apart within hell. This section would of course be a lot bigger than in the final game - potentially with multiple decisions and outcomes
Returning from hell and facing the consequences of the failed crusade (which could lead to the Bhaalspawn fleeing directly (which could tie into the actual epilogue) or battling any hellspawn that may have escaped the portal (a potential alternate siege scene here??) and finally facing trial for your choices - again tying in the actual ending of SoD
Needless to say that would have required a lot of additional development resources. But imho it felt like we could make such a choice in so many places in the game, that it felt pretty underwhelming that there was actually no choice at all...
Anyways thanks for mentioning Roxanne's mod. I'll surely check that one out Too bad the second part of it is on hold o.O
It's a minor complaint, but one thing that irked me in SOD was the way the characters abused that weapon swinging animation as a point of emphasis when doing things in this game. There are certain points where it's useful - namely, that one Fist in front of the Ducal Palace, plus Hephernan with the one crusader goon on the first bridge - but there, that's because it's important to get across that there's a physical beating happening. Otherwise, you get weird and awkward bits like the argument between Berta and Lon in the Iron Throne building, where they do their spellcasting animation, and it's just completely pointless. I get the sense they were trying to make things feel more dynamic with this, but most of the time, I think it just served to draw more attention to the limitations of the engine. Rather the opposite of their intent, I think.
I can't comment on the main quest OR new NPCs in SoD because I didn't play far enough into it to thoroughly experience those aspects of it. But what drove me away from the game was a LOT of small-ish issues that rapidly piled up until I just couldn't take it anymore. If I had to, I could probably divide the issues into three main categories:
Dialogue options - In BG1, dialogue options were often divided up according to personality or emotion - they could be defiant (i.e.: "I'll never give you that money!"), rational ("Maybe we can work out a deal?"), or timid/scared ("OK, I'll give you the money, just leave me alone!"). The significance here is that options like these aren't inherently good or evil, so they can apply across a number of alignments.
In SoD, the options are divided up much more so according to alignment, which (at least in my experience) often made it difficult to choose responses without breaking immersion. For example, in one instance in which city guards ask you to do them a favor, the ONLY option that enables you to accept their request says something like, "I'm always willing to help out the guards," which is almost certainly NOT true for anyone other than LG alignment. Even playing as a NG barbarian (which should really be the EASIEST alignment to find dialogue options for), I often found myself being forced to break immersion with my character.
Side quests - This was probably my biggest issue with the game. The side quests are very awkwardly introduced and poorly implemented IMO. Right at the outset of the game, as you're preparing to explore a giant underground lair filled with various undead and thugs, you're given a standard "Go fetch me some ingredient for my concoction" quest - which not only is completely out of place with your surroundings, but also is the kind of quest that is more appropriate for when you're starting out with 0 experience in Candlekeep.
But the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" for me was the quest involving your stolen gold and the muggers, which may be THE most poorly implemented quest in the entire BG series IMO. First, it starts with you WILLINGLY PARTING WITH ALL OF YOUR GOLD while staying at a palace - something that you've NEVER been asked to do while staying anywhere in the BG games. Then it turns out that the gold is being kept in a basement (that doubles as a prison, IIRC), "guarded" by ONE shabby-looking guy, who was apparently able to take EVERY cent of yours (and ONLY yours, apparently) and leave the palace with it (apparently thinking you would never notice or come back for it?). Then you trust him to leave by himself and go get it back for you (no need to report this crook to his superiors or anything), THEN he returns empty-handed saying he was brutally assaulted and the muggers took exactly EVERY cent he was bringing to you. Then when you track down the muggers, they're in a tavern gleefully "toasting" to the guy they beat up, and they tell you that you shouldn't be too angry because they gave some of the money to some refugees. Your dialogue options are then to, 1. Wish the guys well, 2. Politely ask them to turn themselves into the guard - which they then unquestioningly do?? 3. Tell them they "have a problem, a fatal one" - after which they attack you.
To top all of this off, if you choose the third option, the game journal will actually try to make you look bad by indicating that you attacked them out of dislike for the refugees - never mind that you spent THE MAJORITY OF BG1 confronting and killing thieves and muggers like these.
Changes to canon story/characters - This might not have been as big an issue for someone who wasn't so emotionally invested in the original game as I can be. I think the change that most irked me was bringing Skie's father back to life, since the entire CLIMAX of BG1 revolves around his death and the race against time to stop Sarevok from being crowned as his successor - which to me, is one of THE most tense and heart-pounding sequences in ANY game, not just BG1. Announcing that Skie's father was really just on the cusp of being brought back to life during that entire sequence really diminishes the significance of it IMO.
I'll admit, Entar is kind of a difficult element in this game, to say the least. Because yeah, while it makes sense that he could be brought back to life given what the setting's like, it still invalidates the original plot point about Sarevok becoming a duke...specifically to replace Entar. Also, I don't know whose idea it was to give him that comical French accent, but they need one hell of an explanation for why he sounds like that, when nobody else in the city, including his own daughter sounds the least bit similar.
And given how important the Silvershields are to the plot, to have their very inclusion open a bunch of plot holes, well, it suggests that the story is fundamentally compromised.
Announcing that Skie's father was really just on the cusp of being brought back to life during that entire sequence really diminishes the significance of it IMO.
Just a quick note to this: I agree that it feels strange and had never thought about it before. Yet, I always saw it as canon that Duke Silvershield gets resurrected - or at least it isn't excluded (whereas concerning Scar there is no information whatsoever). I don't recall where I have this info from, but I searched for it long before SoD was released. From this point of view, it would be BG1 being the drama queen, actually.
"Announcing that Skie's father was really just on the cusp of being brought back to life during that entire sequence really diminishes the significance of it IMO."
Really? Why? Nothing in BG1 says he can't be brought back. Remember that the Dukes were actively trying to prevent a war that Sarevok wanted. The assassination was was most certainly spun as Amnish agression. Entar looks weak, if he can't protect himself, how can he protect Baldur's Gate? Sarevok, who was already gaining favor amongst the nobility, steps up as a stronger successor that will do what is neccesssarry to protect the people. It fits together really well IMO. Entar would have been ressurrected only to find out he had been replaced.
Announcing that Skie's father was really just on the cusp of being brought back to life during that entire sequence really diminishes the significance of it IMO.
Just a quick note to this: I agree that it feels strange and had never thought about it before. Yet, I always saw it as canon that Duke Silvershield gets resurrected - or at least it isn't excluded (whereas concerning Scar there is no information whatsoever). I don't recall where I have this info from, but I searched for it long before SoD was released. From this point of view, it would be BG1 being the drama queen, actually.
@jastey Excuse the side note here, but your work on Scar, The Return (from Romantic Encounters) adds an alternate ending that is quite good.
@Zaghoul Thank you very much for the kind words! Preparing that was the occasion where I made research whether there is any canon information about who is resurrected when. (Since I didn't find any info on Scar the component tries to refect that.)
Well there are continuity problems between BG1-2 as well, but what I don't get is how trying to breach the gap between the two games with SoD ended up creating more continuity issues, since as of this moment BG2 still pretends SoD never happened.
I mean what was the plan here when SoD was in the planning stages?(And yes I know SoD was initially conceived as a standalone game separate from the series) Because I honestly thought there would be some sort of reference in shadows of amn through a patch or something. A small quest or I don't know ''something''
And if they can spend time rewriting Mizhena, then certainly they can offer more closure for the whole Soultaker plot somehow..?:\
Also lately I've been thinking it's a pity Imoen was sent away AGAIN..It's pretty much like Shadows of Amn wheres shes hardly involved at all.. Nono.. off to Hogwarts with you.
I enjoy SoD a lot. Everything “works” imho - the writting, the story, the quests and the npc’s.
I have enjoyed the ee era so far. The npc’s work well and blend in nicely. The ee npc’s are better than the BG1 counterparts, and up to par with most bg2 npc’s.
Off course they cant stand up besides the well written Anomen D. (he is my number one go to guy, and I always put up with him - he did grow up with an abussive parent and is a veteran, so cut him some slack).
So in all I have massive respect for the ee add ons, and while I fully support the closing of plotholes, its only because I would love to see more new Beamdog content in the BG:ee saga and in Iwd:ee.
I only skimmed through the thread, after the first couple of pages.
Like many others (I imagine), Baldur's Gate was my first and the most beloved cRPG back then, filling christmas holidays in 1998.
I shied away from the Enhanced Editions for quite some time, because I feared it would spoil my fond memories of that time, but gave them a chance recently and I have to say, I'm really pleasantly surprised.
Onto the topic at hand: I just finished a playthrough of SoD (imported from BG:EE). All in all, I have no strong feelings about the expansion either way. There is a couple of things, I enjoyed and some things, I laughed about, but also a lot that left me ... unsatisfied.
My party was Charname - Berserker Safana - Imoen replacement Corwin - Garrick replacement Minsc & Dynaheir - all the way Viconia - all the way With bgtweaks happy patch in case someone is wondering.
Things that made the game less enjoyable for me: a) The mainplot.
The plot itself and the dynamics between CHARNAME and Caelar didn't really make sense to me. For a long time, I wondered, what the hell all this crusade was actually about. Everybody around me was taking about "THE" Crusade as if it was obvious what that meant, yet all I had to go by was a pamphlet, that didn't really explain much. Why the shining lady would burn down everything on her way to Dragonspear didn't really make sense, after all she was not marching on Baldur's Gate and had to secure the way behind her, etc. Would it not be much more in character for a lawful good Paladin to actually seek cooperation with authorities? What greater good is she sacrificing all this for?
Ofc, I can make up some reasons for the behaviour, but I feel the game should explain these things better or simply not mention them at all. Instead of creating a situation where Charname might be torn between his self-interest, the interest of the involved political groups, the well-being of the swordcoast and the greater good of Caelars cause, it just felt somewhat forced to me.
The whole plot also reminded me a little bit too much of "Mask of the Betrayer and Akachis Crusade".
Skie's Muder came a little out of nowhere. Nobody from the nobles, even wanting to hear Charname out (at 20 reputation) was unbelievable... There should have been another way to make the hero of Baldur's Gate (re)unite with the canon party. Also some of Dynaheirs lines in the end felt alienating, since we had spend so much time together.
b) While I enjoyed references to other great games like PST, NWN, the references to Noober or the Larryl, Darryl and ... the third guy alienated me. It felt like SoD was trying a bit too hard in these spots and just copied what was already in the game. These might have worked better, if they were at least a bit altered, but having played straight from Baldur's Gate, my memories were also still kinda fresh.
c) I'm playing on a rather weak computer and the huge amount of bystanders aswell as the number of attackers slowed the framerate down considerably in various spots (for instance when marching out/in Baldur's Gate around Sorcerous Sundries).
Ambigous spots: a) The Hooded Man. I do love his voice actor, he does such a great job. I never finished BG2 up until today, every time he was involved, I found myself hoping for clues, what was his role? What does he know? What does he want? This was perfectly in line with BG2 and made me really look forward to the dream sequences with him. However, again some things didn't add up.
In one of the conversations between Caelar and Irenicus, he asks if father or mother, implying that he knows that Caelar is a Bhaalspawn, which she clearly isn't, else she would just spill her own blood, no? So it takes away a lot from the portrait that Irenicus knows so much more about this whole Bhaalspawn business. Why does he even have an interest in her? Would an "normal" Aasimar also suffice for his plans (whichever those may be...)?
b) Dialogue options. It seemd obvious to me, there was pretty much always a "noble-heroic", a "ironic-selfish" and an "evil, threatening" dialogue option as it is the case with modern games, most notably Dragon Age II's Hawke. I appreciated the attempt to play a more jester-like figure and some of the answers were quite hilarous, but I'd still prefer that evil isn't necessarily rude. Ultimately the options didn't blend in well with the rest of the old game. Also different options don't regularly lead to different dialoguetrees which is a shame and something those old games did better.
c) Little fetch-sidequests. I liked that various caves were just small caves and their settings fitting. Eventually I started ignoring these quests however, because I felt level 8 Charname couldn't really be bothered. Just go barefoot, man.
The good: a) The graphical enhancements seem to be phenomenal for such an old engine. I was really surprised. b) I loved the guy with his 3 things from the Inn, where Charname really has to decide, do I want to keep these 3 things or return them. c) The new items. They were interesting enough, but not overpowering so that one had to have them.
Well. I think, there is more to say, but maybe this small bit of feedback helps.
I don't think Dynaheir in original (unmodded) game ever states her search for Bhaalspawn? I think it's added by BG1NPC Project, tbh.
You have to charm her, before recruiting her. When charmed, she will explain that she is sent by the Wychlaran to determine, if Alaundo's prophecies are true and she and Minsc are searching for Bhaalspawn.
@Tarnfara The purpose of the Crusade is meant to be a mystery in the begining. The only things anyone knows about is that the people that make up the army are calling it a Crusade, and that it is lead by a "shining lady". The main plot is finding out what its purpose is, and to stop it.
Irenicus used to be an elf and they live very long lives and have a divine soul in spiritual ways. His goal is to steal a divine soul. This means picking someone who is a descendant of a God. Doesn't matter which God but the descendant with the strongest bloodline is going to have more power and be closer to the divine or more divine. That is why he was choosing between the two. You are not sure if she is a Bhaalspawn but I'm pretty sure John is very informed and did his research.
Personally, I hated that they brought back Duke Silvershield. It hurts the impact of the original game and the resurrection thing is very gamey. I don't like seeing it written into a story. I think they could have made Ski a celebrity type that wanted to prove to people that she could be a soldier. If the word going around was that you killed her and you were a child of Bhaal it would have turned the public into an outraged, irate mob. Then the Dukes could side with you and decide to skoot you out of the city before the public tore you apart. It would have worked out without bringing back Duke Silvershield or having this soul taker thing that never comes to any conclusion.
@Tarnfara The purpose of the Crusade is meant to be a mystery in the begining. The only things anyone knows about is that the people that make up the army are calling it a Crusade, and that it is lead by a "shining lady". The main plot is finding out what its purpose is, and to stop it.
This is the part of SOD's story that bothers me the most, really. If this Crusade is so mysterious and it's goals unknown, and yet they are marching through lands like an army and confiscating goods, why would anyone consider them "good" at all or swear devotion to them in numbers like that, the whole thing just doesn't work for me really. Just feel too obviously like it's supposed to arouse interest but for me it just left me with no compelling reason to do anything. Other than, of course, the obligatory "well they assaulted/kidnapped your sis/murdered your dad anyway, so even if you have no other reason, go get em tiger!".
@WarChiefZeke No one is assuming they are good. When the Crusade rolls into town you either join, and torch your village, or don't join, and become homeless as your village is torched. The Crusade is also lead by an Argent, a member of one of the noblest Paladin orders, as well as an Aasimar. She acts as a reverse of charname much the same way Sarevok did. While people assume you are evil based solely on your heritage, and Sarevok was able to become something of a hero in the eyes of the people despite actually being evil. Caelar's heritage is such that those who know of her, assume she MUST have a good reason, after all, Paladins and especially Aasimar's HAVE to be good right? And remember, the dukes send you to stop the crusade, not help it.
It has been some time. I didn't want to spoil myself, so I hesitated to read some things about The Hooded Man/BG2, etc, but since I'm through with BG2 now, that's no longer a concern.
So I just finished another playthrough of BG1 -> SoD (currently setting up mods for BG2, SCS installation takes forever...) and this time around I enjoyed the Siege much more than before.
Team: Charname: Dark Moon Monk Dorn -> Safana -> Dorn Viconia Edwin Eldoth -> Baeloth Skie -> M'khiin So yeah, after finally getting Dorn back, I had no longer a thief in my party, which didn't really matter at all.
I actually wanted to try out Glint, but with Viconia I and M'khiin that would have been a little too much divine casting for my liking and I couldn't really let go of her, since it's so nice to have another devotee to Shar at my side...
---- I feel that having finished BG2 shortly before, somehow made some issues I had a lot more forgivable. While playing BG2 I noticed a lot of weird dialogue, out of character actions, 4th wall breaking, etc. So in hindsight similar problems with Siege don't stand out that much anymore. Also, I wasn't rushing to finally get the conclusion to the story in BG2/TOB anymore, which made me take a lot more time to explore the marvellous areas in siege.
----
Playing an evil character, romancing Dorn felt really satisfying. I was twirling my imaginative moustache while completly obliberating everything in my path with two Drow, a Red wizard and a goddman blackguard in my party. We also kept Baeloth's goblin, because someone had to cook for us. She tried to protest, but nobody really cared. Partybanter was hilarous, I really liked some of Dorns interjections, and one of his voiced lines sent little chills down my spine, everytime I heard it. Who would have thought? I wouldn't take Baeloth with me a second time, but he is great to have around for one run.
----
Since in nature I'm the hoarder type of player who usually chooses party compositions as to make use of as many powerful items as possible, it was really nice to have a change of pace with the monk class, who well... doesn't really use weapons all that much. The monk only items were appreciated all the more and I finally managed to use more than half of my potions. Having low reputation also kept the moneyflow in check, which made asking for rewards so much more logical. I really liked it, but it's not siege specific.
Also for example Dynaheir's lines in the end made a lot more sense for this particular charname than the previous one. So in general continuity issues are there but highly dependant on your actual character and his party. This time around I had some alienating feelings with Skie, but not as bad as before.
---- To summarize: Siege kinda grew on me and I'm already looking forward to the next time, I go through it. With my metagame knowledge I'm skipping/avoiding parts that I don't like and it seems Siege offers some alternate paths to be played, as I noticed a lot of items/spots near the end that I couldn't really interact with on my playthrough, because I made some choices or so I think.
greetings
p.s.
Best part about being evil is to kill the first guy who gives you a stupid fetchquest after the first bit of dialogue. Want me to fetch some dumb moss for you? You are here, thus you are my enemy, die!
Even with it's (very minor flaws) Siege of Dragonspear felt very necessary and the right move for a "sequel" for one simple reason: ever since Baldur's Gate 2 came out, the transition from defeating Sarevok to ending up in a cage in the dungeon of Irenicus felt completely random and out of the blue. The saga NEEDED a bridge to make it perhaps THE most epic RPG saga of all time. And it also added another 25-30 hours onto a full-play. Now, when one sits down and makes a new character and walks in a circle around Candlekeep, if they intend on experiencing most of the content with that character, they are looking at the possibility of a 250 hour quest.
Comments
I don't think Dynaheir in original (unmodded) game ever states her search for Bhaalspawn? I think it's added by BG1NPC Project, tbh.
I posted these motivations myself a while back somewhere on these forums. They are what came to me after pondering about it for a while - because their joining was something SoD was supposed to *explain* but failed.
Maybe here is not the best place. Ask the author directly is far better.
But it strikes me the same type of mistake was made.
Too keen to make "their" mark, too keen to update in an effort to be "relevant".
Hubris in a nutshell.
I’m almost to the end of my second SoD playthrough, but I’m pretty certain that Dynaheir or Jaheira says something along the lines of
Star Wars Holiday Special
Anyways I would have expected something along the lines of:
- Joining Caelar and agreeing to follow her crusade, using your blood to open the portal (voluntarily or not)
- Making some last minute preparations (side quests similar to the under-cover quests in Dragonspear), however not so much focussed on the alliance (they should, if I'm not mistaken, be a few days behind) but rather on the invasion of hell
- Potentially falling for Hephernan's trap - i.e. witnessing the crusade fall apart within hell. This section would of course be a lot bigger than in the final game - potentially with multiple decisions and outcomes
- Returning from hell and facing the consequences of the failed crusade (which could lead to the Bhaalspawn fleeing directly (which could tie into the actual epilogue) or battling any hellspawn that may have escaped the portal (a potential alternate siege scene here??) and finally facing trial for your choices - again tying in the actual ending of SoD
Needless to say that would have required a lot of additional development resources. But imho it felt like we could make such a choice in so many places in the game, that it felt pretty underwhelming that there was actually no choice at all...Anyways thanks for mentioning Roxanne's mod. I'll surely check that one out
I can't comment on the main quest OR new NPCs in SoD because I didn't play far enough into it to thoroughly experience those aspects of it. But what drove me away from the game was a LOT of small-ish issues that rapidly piled up until I just couldn't take it anymore. If I had to, I could probably divide the issues into three main categories:
Dialogue options - In BG1, dialogue options were often divided up according to personality or emotion - they could be defiant (i.e.: "I'll never give you that money!"), rational ("Maybe we can work out a deal?"), or timid/scared ("OK, I'll give you the money, just leave me alone!"). The significance here is that options like these aren't inherently good or evil, so they can apply across a number of alignments.
In SoD, the options are divided up much more so according to alignment, which (at least in my experience) often made it difficult to choose responses without breaking immersion. For example, in one instance in which city guards ask you to do them a favor, the ONLY option that enables you to accept their request says something like, "I'm always willing to help out the guards," which is almost certainly NOT true for anyone other than LG alignment. Even playing as a NG barbarian (which should really be the EASIEST alignment to find dialogue options for), I often found myself being forced to break immersion with my character.
Side quests - This was probably my biggest issue with the game. The side quests are very awkwardly introduced and poorly implemented IMO. Right at the outset of the game, as you're preparing to explore a giant underground lair filled with various undead and thugs, you're given a standard "Go fetch me some ingredient for my concoction" quest - which not only is completely out of place with your surroundings, but also is the kind of quest that is more appropriate for when you're starting out with 0 experience in Candlekeep.
But the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" for me was the quest involving your stolen gold and the muggers, which may be THE most poorly implemented quest in the entire BG series IMO. First, it starts with you WILLINGLY PARTING WITH ALL OF YOUR GOLD while staying at a palace - something that you've NEVER been asked to do while staying anywhere in the BG games. Then it turns out that the gold is being kept in a basement (that doubles as a prison, IIRC), "guarded" by ONE shabby-looking guy, who was apparently able to take EVERY cent of yours (and ONLY yours, apparently) and leave the palace with it (apparently thinking you would never notice or come back for it?). Then you trust him to leave by himself and go get it back for you (no need to report this crook to his superiors or anything), THEN he returns empty-handed saying he was brutally assaulted and the muggers took exactly EVERY cent he was bringing to you. Then when you track down the muggers, they're in a tavern gleefully "toasting" to the guy they beat up, and they tell you that you shouldn't be too angry because they gave some of the money to some refugees. Your dialogue options are then to,
1. Wish the guys well,
2. Politely ask them to turn themselves into the guard - which they then unquestioningly do??
3. Tell them they "have a problem, a fatal one" - after which they attack you.
To top all of this off, if you choose the third option, the game journal will actually try to make you look bad by indicating that you attacked them out of dislike for the refugees - never mind that you spent THE MAJORITY OF BG1 confronting and killing thieves and muggers like these.
Changes to canon story/characters - This might not have been as big an issue for someone who wasn't so emotionally invested in the original game as I can be. I think the change that most irked me was bringing Skie's father back to life, since the entire CLIMAX of BG1 revolves around his death and the race against time to stop Sarevok from being crowned as his successor - which to me, is one of THE most tense and heart-pounding sequences in ANY game, not just BG1. Announcing that Skie's father was really just on the cusp of being brought back to life during that entire sequence really diminishes the significance of it IMO.
Well, that's my insane rant on the subject, LOL.
And given how important the Silvershields are to the plot, to have their very inclusion open a bunch of plot holes, well, it suggests that the story is fundamentally compromised.
Yet, I always saw it as canon that Duke Silvershield gets resurrected - or at least it isn't excluded (whereas concerning Scar there is no information whatsoever). I don't recall where I have this info from, but I searched for it long before SoD was released.
From this point of view, it would be BG1 being the drama queen, actually.
Really? Why? Nothing in BG1 says he can't be brought back. Remember that the Dukes were actively trying to prevent a war that Sarevok wanted. The assassination was was most certainly spun as Amnish agression. Entar looks weak, if he can't protect himself, how can he protect Baldur's Gate? Sarevok, who was already gaining favor amongst the nobility, steps up as a stronger successor that will do what is neccesssarry to protect the people. It fits together really well IMO. Entar would have been ressurrected only to find out he had been replaced.
I mean what was the plan here when SoD was in the planning stages?(And yes I know SoD was initially conceived as a standalone game separate from the series) Because I honestly thought there would be some sort of reference in shadows of amn through a patch or something. A small quest or I don't know ''something''
And if they can spend time rewriting Mizhena, then certainly they can offer more closure for the whole Soultaker plot somehow..?:\
Also lately I've been thinking it's a pity Imoen was sent away AGAIN..It's pretty much like Shadows of Amn wheres shes hardly involved at all.. Nono.. off to Hogwarts with you.
I enjoy SoD a lot. Everything “works” imho - the writting, the story, the quests and the npc’s.
I have enjoyed the ee era so far. The npc’s work well and blend in nicely. The ee npc’s are better than the BG1 counterparts, and up to par with most bg2 npc’s.
Off course they cant stand up besides the well written Anomen D. (he is my number one go to guy, and I always put up with him - he did grow up with an abussive parent and is a veteran, so cut him some slack).
So in all I have massive respect for the ee add ons, and while I fully support the closing of plotholes, its only because I would love to see more new Beamdog content in the BG:ee saga and in Iwd:ee.
Like many others (I imagine), Baldur's Gate was my first and the most beloved cRPG back then, filling christmas holidays in 1998.
I shied away from the Enhanced Editions for quite some time, because I feared it would spoil my fond memories of that time, but gave them a chance recently and I have to say, I'm really pleasantly surprised.
Onto the topic at hand:
I just finished a playthrough of SoD (imported from BG:EE). All in all, I have no strong feelings about the expansion either way. There is a couple of things, I enjoyed and some things, I laughed about, but also a lot that left me ... unsatisfied.
My party was
Charname - Berserker
Safana - Imoen replacement
Corwin - Garrick replacement
Minsc & Dynaheir - all the way
Viconia - all the way
With bgtweaks happy patch in case someone is wondering.
Things that made the game less enjoyable for me:
a) The mainplot.
Ofc, I can make up some reasons for the behaviour, but I feel the game should explain these things better or simply not mention them at all. Instead of creating a situation where Charname might be torn between his self-interest, the interest of the involved political groups, the well-being of the swordcoast and the greater good of Caelars cause, it just felt somewhat forced to me.
The whole plot also reminded me a little bit too much of "Mask of the Betrayer and Akachis Crusade".
Skie's Muder came a little out of nowhere. Nobody from the nobles, even wanting to hear Charname out (at 20 reputation) was unbelievable... There should have been another way to make the hero of Baldur's Gate (re)unite with the canon party. Also some of Dynaheirs lines in the end felt alienating, since we had spend so much time together.
b) While I enjoyed references to other great games like PST, NWN, the references to Noober or the Larryl, Darryl and ... the third guy alienated me. It felt like SoD was trying a bit too hard in these spots and just copied what was already in the game. These might have worked better, if they were at least a bit altered, but having played straight from Baldur's Gate, my memories were also still kinda fresh.
c) I'm playing on a rather weak computer and the huge amount of bystanders aswell as the number of attackers slowed the framerate down considerably in various spots (for instance when marching out/in Baldur's Gate around Sorcerous Sundries).
Ambigous spots:
a) The Hooded Man.
I do love his voice actor, he does such a great job.
I never finished BG2 up until today, every time he was involved, I found myself hoping for clues, what was his role? What does he know? What does he want? This was perfectly in line with BG2 and made me really look forward to the dream sequences with him.
However, again some things didn't add up.
b) Dialogue options. It seemd obvious to me, there was pretty much always a "noble-heroic", a "ironic-selfish" and an "evil, threatening" dialogue option as it is the case with modern games, most notably Dragon Age II's Hawke.
I appreciated the attempt to play a more jester-like figure and some of the answers were quite hilarous, but I'd still prefer that evil isn't necessarily rude. Ultimately the options didn't blend in well with the rest of the old game. Also different options don't regularly lead to different dialoguetrees which is a shame and something those old games did better.
c) Little fetch-sidequests. I liked that various caves were just small caves and their settings fitting. Eventually I started ignoring these quests however, because I felt level 8 Charname couldn't really be bothered. Just go barefoot, man.
The good:
a) The graphical enhancements seem to be phenomenal for such an old engine. I was really surprised.
b) I loved the guy with his 3 things from the Inn, where Charname really has to decide, do I want to keep these 3 things or return them.
c) The new items. They were interesting enough, but not overpowering so that one had to have them.
Well. I think, there is more to say, but maybe this small bit of feedback helps.
greetings
Personally, I hated that they brought back Duke Silvershield. It hurts the impact of the original game and the resurrection thing is very gamey. I don't like seeing it written into a story. I think they could have made Ski a celebrity type that wanted to prove to people that she could be a soldier. If the word going around was that you killed her and you were a child of Bhaal it would have turned the public into an outraged, irate mob. Then the Dukes could side with you and decide to skoot you out of the city before the public tore you apart. It would have worked out without bringing back Duke Silvershield or having this soul taker thing that never comes to any conclusion.
The game is good regardless. My opinion.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/64078/sod-story-discussion#latest
The Crusade is also lead by an Argent, a member of one of the noblest Paladin orders, as well as an Aasimar. She acts as a reverse of charname much the same way Sarevok did. While people assume you are evil based solely on your heritage, and Sarevok was able to become something of a hero in the eyes of the people despite actually being evil. Caelar's heritage is such that those who know of her, assume she MUST have a good reason, after all, Paladins and especially Aasimar's HAVE to be good right? And remember, the dukes send you to stop the crusade, not help it.
So I just finished another playthrough of BG1 -> SoD (currently setting up mods for BG2, SCS installation takes forever...) and this time around I enjoyed the Siege much more than before.
Team:
Charname: Dark Moon Monk
Dorn -> Safana -> Dorn
Viconia
Edwin
Eldoth -> Baeloth
Skie -> M'khiin
So yeah, after finally getting Dorn back, I had no longer a thief in my party, which didn't really matter at all.
I actually wanted to try out Glint, but with Viconia I and M'khiin that would have been a little too much divine casting for my liking and I couldn't really let go of her, since it's so nice to have another devotee to Shar at my side...
----
I feel that having finished BG2 shortly before, somehow made some issues I had a lot more forgivable. While playing BG2 I noticed a lot of weird dialogue, out of character actions, 4th wall breaking, etc. So in hindsight similar problems with Siege don't stand out that much anymore.
Also, I wasn't rushing to finally get the conclusion to the story in BG2/TOB anymore, which made me take a lot more time to explore the marvellous areas in siege.
----
Playing an evil character, romancing Dorn felt really satisfying. I was twirling my imaginative moustache while completly obliberating everything in my path with two Drow, a Red wizard and a goddman blackguard in my party. We also kept Baeloth's goblin, because someone had to cook for us. She tried to protest, but nobody really cared.
Partybanter was hilarous, I really liked some of Dorns interjections, and one of his voiced lines sent little chills down my spine, everytime I heard it. Who would have thought? I wouldn't take Baeloth with me a second time, but he is great to have around for one run.
----
Since in nature I'm the hoarder type of player who usually chooses party compositions as to make use of as many powerful items as possible, it was really nice to have a change of pace with the monk class, who well... doesn't really use weapons all that much. The monk only items were appreciated all the more and I finally managed to use more than half of my potions. Having low reputation also kept the moneyflow in check, which made asking for rewards so much more logical. I really liked it, but it's not siege specific.
Also for example Dynaheir's lines in the end made a lot more sense for this particular charname than the previous one. So in general continuity issues are there but highly dependant on your actual character and his party. This time around I had some alienating feelings with Skie, but not as bad as before.
----
To summarize: Siege kinda grew on me and I'm already looking forward to the next time, I go through it. With my metagame knowledge I'm skipping/avoiding parts that I don't like and it seems Siege offers some alternate paths to be played, as I noticed a lot of items/spots near the end that I couldn't really interact with on my playthrough, because I made some choices or so I think.
greetings
p.s.